Officer in Grafner case lacked child interview training

Questioned boy in abuse case

The Denver detective assigned to find out from 6-year-old Chandler Grafner whether he had been abused testified Wednesday that, at the time, he had no forensic training in how to interview a child.

Now that he has had the training, Denver police Detective Curtis Johnson said he realizes that the questions he asked Chandler may have led the child to cover up what the couple who cared for him are accused of doing to him.

Chandler denied during Johnson's interview that he had been abused and said that his legal guardian, Jon Phillips, "respected him."

Johnson testified during a pretrial hearing in the first-degree murder case against Phillips and his girlfriend, Sarah Berry. The couple were charged with first-degree murder after Chandler died May 6.

The 7-year-old weighed only 34 pounds when he died. The coroner declared he died of starvation and dehydration.

Dave Fisher, chief of the Denver Police Department's investigation division, said he could not directly discuss Chandler's case because it has not gone to trial, but he praised Johnson, who has been with the department for 11 years.

"He is an excellent investigator, and that is why he was assigned to the child-abuse unit, and it takes a very special kind of detective to work in that environment," Fisher said.

"Like any profession, they receive additional training for specific areas of expertise," he said.

"Not all training is offered five days a week. In police training, we have to watch for opportunities to place officers in specialized training when it is available."

Johnson was promoted from assault detective — where he had been trained and conducted hundreds of interviews — to the child-abuse unit just three weeks before his Jan. 22, 2006, interview with Chandler, then 6 years old, and his 4-year-old half brother, Dominick Phillips.

Those few weeks had apparently not given Denver police enough time to find training classes Johnson could attend to learn special techniques for interviewing children.

Now that he has had that training, Johnson said, his reading of a transcript of his interviews with the boys made him realize his questioning was not adequate.

More open-ended questions

Johnson testified he would now ask more open-ended questions.

The interview took place five days after Chandler told several school employees that he got slapped and fell in the bathroom. Johnson was not aware of what Chandler told people at school at the time he questioned him about his injury, the detective testified; he had only a printout from the Denver Department of Human Services that did not contain statements from the school employees.

By the time Johnson interviewed Chandler, the Department of Human Services had returned the boy and his brother to Phillips and Berry.

By then, Chandler had changed the story he told at school, telling Johnson that he fell in the shower and that his father did not hit him.

Johnson testified that he asked Chandler whether he remembered falling in the shower and asked the boy whether he had done anything wrong — questions the detective now says were "leading" questions.

Children are "suggestible"

Karen Blackwell, manager of the forensic interview program at the Denver Children's Advocacy Center who conducts hundreds of interviews of children every year, says kids are "suggestible" because they see adults as authority figures.

"You can plant things in the conversation to get them to agree with you," Blackwell said.

Asking a leading question that calls for a "yes" or "no" answer such as "Sam hit you in the eye, didn't he?" may not elicit an accurate response.

"The leading question," Blackwell said, "is not a good way to interview kids because they are not telling you freely what their experiences are."

One-day event to run slide down University HillIt's not quite the alternative mode of transportation that Boulder's used to, but, for one day this summer, residents will be able to traverse several city blocks atop inflatable tubes.